Saturday, October 15, 2011

My suggestion to AMD: Core count sells...

Why people are spending precious $ on slow CPUs such as Atom which can’t even do 720p? They are fast enough for typical word processing jobs. I bought a 1GHz C50 APU powered netbook and installed virtual machines on it. It served me well on a trip. I even did some development work on it. It is not very fast, but fast enough.

For my regular desktop, the CPU is a Phenom II X4 at 3.4GHz. The CPU is plenty fast for most tasks. To improve response time, the money is better spent for moving the system partition to a SSD, so OS and programs load fast…

If AMD can die shrink the Phenom II from 45nm to 32nm thus reducing power consumption along the way, I will be happy to buy a new one. A Phenom II 1090T at 80 watts would be very attractive.

When you have a new design coupled with a new process, the risk factors just multiply. Die shrinking should be one of the key strategies AMD adopt to react faster to market demand and reduce risk & cost.

Still, I will buy a 8 Core 3GHz processor just for the numbers. The bigger the better. 8 is greater than 4 and core count sells.

It is undeniable that the FX 8150 is indeed faster than i7 2600k on some benchmarks. There was some improvement. So it is not all negative.

From what I see, the AMD FX has a major memory bottleneck. Its memory write speed is substantially lower than Intel’s i7.

Intel copied the AMD64, multi-core and Direct Connect architecture from AMD and is laughing to the bank with all these AMD innovations. AMD engineers are very creative, but they have to work harder to create something much faster. Or they will end up jobless and have their names associated with a chip that disappoints the AMD support base and amuses the Intel camp.

11 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

False. We have over 100 Atom based HTPC's in production that do not only 720p but 1080p as well.

So - once again someone comes along that shoots down your bullshit hallucinations.

Get a life and find something meaningful to do with it other than be a complete and utter failure like Bulldozer is.

12:29 PM, October 15, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They already did die shrinking, its called Llano


Also, take a peek here:

http://www.overclock.net/amd-cpus/1141188-asus-crosshair-v-formula-board-may.html

12:31 PM, October 15, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

<<<
When you have a new design coupled with a new process, the risk factors just multiply. Die shrinking should be one of the key strategies AMD adopt to react faster to market demand and reduce risk & cost.
>>>

Oh for fuck's sake! Do you think they DON'T know this? I take back my criticism of other posters who were rude to you - you are just stupid.

Do you even have a Ph.D? If so, it certainly doesn't seem to be in anything remotely technology related.

ROFLMAO! You seem to be giving up pretty quick on the FX if your big suggestion to AMD is to process shrink their old CPU design! LOL!

You better pray that Interlagos looks way better as a server CPU than FX does as a desktop CPU, or AMD is really in deep shit. They'll still have all the problems they have now with it - it is big and hot for the performance delivered, but it needs to be competitive or they just don't have anything.

2:04 PM, October 15, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"ROFLMAO! You seem to be giving up pretty quick on the FX if your big suggestion to AMD is to process shrink their old CPU design! LOL!"

Yes, that would be same as suggesting Intel to go die shring P3 after they found P4 is not quite up to the task...oh, wait...

2:44 PM, October 15, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ROFLMAO

Cores sell as long as they offer real performance within the same power envelope.

The POS Barcelona II FX is cornholed.

4 Intel cores are better than 8 AMD cores.

AMD "flagship" Barcelona II part falls flat on its face. The FX brand irreparably damaged.

Nice job, AMDtards. You've handed Intel a nice market share bump gift.

ROFLMAO

9:46 PM, October 15, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"....disappoints the AMD support base and amuses the Intel camp."

Kinda like you, eh Sharidouche?

1:26 PM, October 16, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

$14b .....

3:53 PM, October 18, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Stop AMD-fanboy idiocy: Mention the Intel Timna processor

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Timna/

Intel Timna, a processor with an integrated memory controller, were rolling off Intel assembly lines back in the year 2000 before it was cancelled. It also had integrated graphics incorporated, far before AMD had any plans about "Fusion".

It's funny the first few times reading moronic comments like "Intel copied AMD" and "AMD is the one that innovates" but I think enough is enough.

9:53 PM, October 18, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"When you have a new design coupled with a new process, the risk factors just multiply. Die shrinking should be one of the key strategies AMD adopt to react faster to market demand and reduce risk & cost."

So, Sharikou is telling AMD to copy Intel's 'tick-tock'? COPY INTEL?? Now I think the world did end this morning..

4:05 PM, October 21, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Seeing as how AMD either bought (via Cyrix or ATI) or copied (Intel) everything they do, why not.

AMD is doomed. Their small profit they made this quarter will be eaten alive by the failure that is Bulldozer and their expiring agreement with Global Foundries. They will suddenly have to eat the loss on all their substandard parts and the losses will be too great for them to manage on the sales of their low end APUs and graphics cards alone.

Meanwhile Intel keeps rolling success after success and record profits every quarter.

AMD BK is set for 2012.

See Sharifag? We can do it too you moronic fuck.

1:16 PM, October 30, 2011  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amd did 64 bit on desktop intel didn't...

7:08 AM, November 13, 2011  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home